Since the initial discussion concerned the prowess of Vega 56 as a mining card and the corresponding effect on prices, I would add that recent efforts with appropriate tuning seem to put Vega at a similar or higher perf/W than the best RX 580/480 cards out there. It hits ~44MH/s, which is the absolute best hashrate of any card in the market, if I am not mistaken.

If true, then I guess AMD's market share will continue its decline. The ATI division will be in a pretty bad place if they fall down to a 15% market share on Steam.

Not even the CPU division has fallen that low (17.72% of last month), and they had almost a decade to get there. By contrast the GPU division is at 18.63%.If less than 15% of your gaming cards are going to gamers, then I think you're making the wrong product.

Since the initial discussion concerned the prowess of Vega 56 as a mining card and the corresponding effect on prices, I would add that recent efforts with appropriate tuning seem to put Vega at a similar or higher perf/W than the best RX 580/480 cards out there. It hits ~44MH/s, which is the absolute best hashrate of any card in the market, if I am not mistaken.

If true, then I guess AMD's market share will continue its decline. The ATI division will be in a pretty bad place if they fall down to a 15% market share on Steam.

Not even the CPU division has fallen that low (17.72% of last month), and they had almost a decade to get there. By contrast the GPU division is at 18.63%.If less than 15% of your gaming cards are going to gamers, then I think you're making the wrong product.

Guessing and sharing that guess doesn't help anyone: AMD's market share is not in decline, it's higher than in recent years and increased last quarter, which is not atypical, and NVIDIA lost share.

The Steam hardware survey is a different kettle of fish to market share numbers, and while AMD's position in it is sad -- and declining -- on both the CPU and GPU front, AMD GPU at 18.63% is above AMD CPU at 17.72%. You do see that?

None of this speaks to the percentage of AMD's manufactured GPUs which end up going to gamers, that's not what the Steam survey measures! I think you're making the wrong argument

Amazon has finally given me a ship date for the vega 56s i ordered... Sep 14-19. Yay. Why is Amazon of all places so slow....

Please share your impression of the Vega 56, especially in the "power saver" profile. If you are not afraid to undervolt, that would also be very interesting. RX580/480 can take a huge amount of undervolt, I'm wandering whether the trend continues with Vega.

The Steam hardware survey is a different kettle of fish to market share numbers, and while AMD's position in it is sad -- and declining -- on both the CPU and GPU front, AMD GPU at 18.63% is above AMD CPU at 17.72%. You do see that?

Yes, and did you see that AMD lost 1.6% in August alone, despite releasing the 500's + Vega and NVIDIA released nothing?

You're quite right that Steam's hardware survey is just a small piece of the market, and AMD's overall add-in board sales have gone up 1.9% from last quarter. But combined with the Steam survey data, it's easy to extrapolate that almost all those boards are going to miners, not gamers. My point being, what gaming studio is going to want to continue to use AMD cards & branding if more than 4 out of 5 gamers are on NVIDIA hardware?

The Steam hardware survey is a different kettle of fish to market share numbers, and while AMD's position in it is sad -- and declining -- on both the CPU and GPU front, AMD GPU at 18.63% is above AMD CPU at 17.72%. You do see that?

Yes, and did you see that AMD lost 1.6% in August alone, despite releasing the 500's + Vega and NVIDIA released nothing?

You're quite right that Steam's hardware survey is just a small piece of the market, and AMD's overall add-in board sales have gone up 1.9% from last quarter. But combined with the Steam survey data, it's easy to extrapolate that almost all those boards are going to miners, not gamers. My point being, what gaming studio is going to want to continue to use AMD cards & branding if more than 4 out of 5 gamers are on NVIDIA hardware?

I've had steam for years and never once participated in their survey. It's not at all representative of overall GPU market share and by trying to portray it as so is extremely misleading to say the least. So you'd rather they were no AMD graphics competition and the next 1160 was $800 I'm sure you'd be the first in the queue to buy it. Never heard of the saying beware what you wish for in case you get it Saying all cards went to miners is absolute FUD as you can't provide one shred of evidence that your comment is true. I'm not a miner and I've got one and if you look at other forums there are a load of people who have Vega cards who are just gamers like me. So please spare us your green tinted BS unless you can back it up please.

Been trying to find an RX 580 for some 1080p game builds recently; just picked up a 1060 for one I gave to a friend as a gift. The 1060s have been a little easier to find but I'd like to put a 580 in my main system to try it out - as I've mentioned in the past, I think that at MSRP it's a better deal than a 1060 6GB, if you're taking into account DX12 / Vulkan performance. And again, at SRP.

But man, these things are selling for double plus those prices, and these are mid-range cards! If you're building/upgrading a system today and you want a good setup for 1080p you can't even buy previous gen AMD stuff for a reasonable price (used 380X cards going for over $200 on ebay, for instance), and the 1060s are hard to find in stock. If you want to step down to RX 560 / GeForce 1050 they're easy enough to find, but while there's normally some pretty decent price gradation in the market, right now it's just one big jump from $150 to $300 and another one to $400. And that gets you into GTX 1070 / Vega 56 territory, where we're back at the original topic - can't find those for MSRP either.

Seems like the only option above that "mainstream" bracket (sub $150) still available close to MSRP is GTX 1080, with those sitting around $550. Very frustrating if you just want to play some games and aren't interested in mining.

On the other hand, at least AMD is making lots of sales, and maybe this will get them some gamer marketshare once miners decide to unload all of their Radeons for custom hardware again.

I've had steam for years and never once participated in their survey. It's not at all representative of overall GPU market share and by trying to portray it as so is extremely misleading to say the least.

If anything, there are pressures the other way: unlike nVidia, which is basically discrete only, there are people with secondary computers using integrated graphics (I am among them) that would skew the results towards Intel, but also to a much lesser extent AMD, in a way contrary to our actual intentions.

Lordhawkwind wrote:

So you'd rather they were no AMD graphics competition and the next 1160 was $800 I'm sure you'd be the first in the queue to buy it. Never heard of the saying beware what you wish for in case you get it

For all your nonsense talk about "green-tinted glasses" this line of unrelated and completely *normative* argument has absolutely nothing to do with Kougar's analysis.

I think you're "seeing red" my friend.

Lordhawkwind wrote:

Saying all cards went to miners is absolute FUD as you can't provide one shred of evidence that your comment is true.

The steam hardware survey combined with a market analysis firm's report is more than "one shred of evidence", and his argument is light-years beyond your completely personal anecdote and hand-wave about forums.

Saying "I got one, I'm real, there are dozens of us, dozens!" is like a primer for a lesson on bad concepts relating to statistics and argument-making.

Because, dude, I want AMD to do better. Of course I do. I'm sure Kougar does too, but that doesn't mean we just can pretend there isn't a significant problem here. Please don't make earnest understanding and forthright criticism into "defeatism".

I've had steam for years and never once participated in their survey. It's not at all representative of overall GPU market share and by trying to portray it as so is extremely misleading to say the least. So you'd rather they were no AMD graphics competition and the next 1160 was $800 I'm sure you'd be the first in the queue to buy it. Never heard of the saying beware what you wish for in case you get it Saying all cards went to miners is absolute FUD as you can't provide one shred of evidence that your comment is true. I'm not a miner and I've got one and if you look at other forums there are a load of people who have Vega cards who are just gamers like me. So please spare us your green tinted BS unless you can back it up please.

Honestly, it's a post like this that makes me wonder where the moderators are.

I've had steam for years and never once participated in their survey. It's not at all representative of overall GPU market share and by trying to portray it as so is extremely misleading to say the least.

The Steam survey has always been useless. In the past, you had over 30% of cards in the "Other" category, and now you've 10 out of the top 10 cards being at least Maxwell, a complete lack of one vendor, and still double-digits in the "Other" category. You can just about toss all those numbers.

Steam is very clearly only polling upon new installs, and then mis-identifying an unacceptable number of cards.

The Steam survey has always been useless. In the past, you had over 30% of cards in the "Other" category, and now you've 10 out of the top 10 cards being at least Maxwell, a complete lack of one vendor, and still double-digits in the "Other" category. You can just about toss all those numbers.

I don't buy it, sorry. To start, most of the anti-steam hardware survey sentiment I see regularly online is so uncomfortably ignorant it hurts. I mean, people describing sampling (yes, really!) and then scoffing and saying that it makes the survey useless...?

It's seriously "I can't even" territory, and it's everywhere.

Likewise with the argument (that Lordhawkwind even used) "*I* never reply, so it's BS". Again, what?

And what you are saying? I mean, OK, but nothing in your criticism invalidates the way Kougar used it, sorry.

Unless you are alleging that Steam (or something else) is systematically "othering" AMD offerings, which you don't, so what? You're just shotgunning buts (but this, but that, but else!) at someone else's barn.

Also, I'm not even sure what "other" means, because it might just be the aggregate of everything below a threshold, and if that threshold is what changed, -not- the attribution, what you are saying is essentially an artifact of presentation.

The Egg wrote:

Steam is very clearly only polling upon new installs

No, it very clearly isn't. (They just asked me again last week).

I think you have some misconceptions here.

The Egg wrote:

and then mis-identifying an unacceptable number of cards.

How are you so sure that's what is happening, as I mentioned above?

I'm loathe to just take your word for it when you've already demonstrated that you're preceding from preconceptions a lot more than actual knowledge.

----EDIT: To be clear, what you are guys are saying is deeply counter-intuitive because there is every reason to think that AMD is bleeding gamer market share. There isn't much of any reason to think the contrary, but that's exactly what you all must be assuming when you discount other evidence that reinforces what we *should* see.

Again, we need to refrain from being normative, because this isn't about what's good or right, it's simply about understanding reality, however unfortunate. Again, I say this because I'm someone who has switched teams every. single. time. for the last 5 cards at least.

I agree. Shotgunning buts at someone else's barn sounds very problematic and will undoubtedly lead to trouble.

Back to Kougar's original question on the future use of AMDs hardware among game developers. I'm hoping that AMD will put at least a portion of all these sales to miners towards improving the efforts of their marketing department. That way maybe they can help swing the pendulum back in their direction without waiting on the next refresh of their hardware, and chances are they need it. Marketing has always been a weak spot for AMD.

Do not meddle in the affairs of archers, for they are subtle and you won't hear them coming.

I mean, OK, but nothing in your criticism invalidates the way Kougar used it, sorry.

I wasn't responding to Kougar; more speaking generally about the Steam survey.

Glorious wrote:

Unless you are alleging that Steam (or something else) is systematically "othering" AMD offerings, which you don't, so what? You're just shotgunning buts (but this, but that, but else!) at someone else's barn.

I'm not alleging anything other than incompetence.

Glorious wrote:

Also, I'm not even sure what "other" means, because it might just be the aggregate of everything below a threshold, and if that threshold is what changed, -not- the attribution, what you are saying is essentially an artifact of presentation.

Possible, but doubtful. The lowest card listed for DX12 is 0.31%, so you would need quite alot of cards below that threshold to account for it. I've also been using Steam since it's inception, and can remember a very long period of time where "Other" accounted for ~25-33% of all cards surveyed.

Glorious wrote:

The Egg wrote:

Steam is very clearly only polling upon new installs

No, it very clearly isn't. (They just asked me again last week).

Maybe you originally deferred the question? Again, doesn't reflect my experience with Steam, which is that it generally asks after a fresh install of the program, and rarely does afterward.

Glorious wrote:

The Egg wrote:

and then mis-identifying an unacceptable number of cards.

How are you so sure that's what is happening, as I mentioned above?

If you look at the survey, you'll see that "Other" is still around 12%, which is nearly twice the amount of the #1 card, and therefore unacceptable.

EDIT: To be clear, what you are guys are saying is deeply counter-intuitive because there is every reason to think that AMD is bleeding gamer market share. There isn't much of any reason to think the contrary, but that's exactly what you all must be assuming when you discount other evidence that reinforces what we *should* see.

Again, we need to refrain from being normative, because this isn't about what's good or right, it's simply about understanding reality, however unfortunate. Again, I say this because I'm someone who has switched teams every. single. time. for the last 5 cards at least.

Dude, come on. You go from "very clearly only polling upon new installs" to "and rarely does afterward" and maybe I'm mistaken?

Considering that my own experience is a (relatively) limited data set of machines/installs and you have a constantly evolving piece of software.........yes, I'm open to the possibility that it may occasionally ask outside a fresh Steam install. That would seem to be the exception to the rule, though, and I was speaking more based off what I saw in the most recent survey. When 10 of the top 10 cards are Maxwell or newer, you and I both know damn well that isn't representative of the community. There's very clearly a fundamental problem with how the survey is being performed.

Glorious wrote:

The Egg wrote:

If you look at the survey, you'll see that "Other" is still around 12%, which is nearly twice the amount of the #1 card, and therefore unacceptable.

Unacceptable according to what criteria? Why does it invalidate Kougar's point?

Unacceptable according to drawing any meaningful conclusion from the data. Yes, 12% being unaccounted for is unacceptable when your top card is 6%. Why do you keep bringing up Kougar again? I haven't even read his post yet, much less mentioned him.

When 10 of the top 10 cards are Maxwell or newer, you and I both know damn well that isn't representative of the community.

No, I don't. What I do know is that this idea of yours is basically make-believe.

I have no idea why you are incredulous about it. Market research independently states that Nvidia is stomping AMD in discrete GPU shipments, and has been for well over a year. We are talking like almost a ~75/25 split, a split which was worsening every quarter until the most recent (Q2 2017) which all the analysts obviously attributed to mining:

And, since AMD cards are much more utilized in mining and since miners typically buy more than one card whereas gamers typically only buy one, seriously, what would you expect a gamer survey to show?

I get back to what I said, the notions you have about this are extremely counter-intuitive: you are discrediting the Steam Hardware Survey for confirming what we should *expect* to see!

The Egg wrote:

Unacceptable according to drawing any meaningful conclusion from the data. Yes, 12% being unaccounted for is unacceptable when your top card is 6%

Again, you are assuming that "Other" means "we have no idea" when that's unlikely to be the case. It is far more likely that "Other" the aggregate of all cards below the presentation threshold.

Unless you are allegedly that AMD cards are systemically being underrepresented, which you are not, what you are saying makes no difference anyway.

And, critically, since they seem to know the manufacturer just fine:

Nvidia: 67.62%AMD: 18.63%Intel: 13.41%Other: 0.34%

The idea that the "Other" category in the list of cards means "No idea" is specious at best.

---

Your position requires that everyone who looks into this subject is incompetent and wrong, whereas I'm supposed to just admit that "I know damn well" that your completely baseless intuition is correct.

Uh, no?

This is one the strangest arguing positions I have ever come across, and to experience it coming from the side of the argument (however loosely you may be associated with it) that is constantly screaming "BIAS" and "GREEN-TINTED GLASSES" is just surreal.

I think it is probably fair to assume that steam is more likely to request a hardware survey with new hardware and new steam installs. At most, this suggests that the true mix of hardware might be distorted moderately by virtue of underrepresenting older hardware - especially since, as far as I know, Valve does not provide any information on time frame for denominators. So while AMD, if loosing gaming market share recently, may be underrepresented to some degree, the results are still a good indication that, recently, Maxwell is vastly outselling AMD by an increasingly wide margin. And that, for whatever recent time frame, Maxwell GPUs have been purchased by Steam subscribers at much higher rates than AMD. Sure, we don't know for certain how accurate the "18%" is, because sampling and denominators are not explicitly defined. But it still likely paints a fairly representative picture of current AMD vs Nvidia GPU adoption by gamers.

It would be nice if Valve published a brief whitepaper detailing the methodology of their hardware survey. Just a summary of how their sampling algorithms work and criteria for determining vendor, and time frames for denominators. But I suppose that would be too much "pro bono" resources even for Valve. And I suppose this might leave them open to even more criticism should they decide to change things up down the line.

On that note, it would also be great if Amazon shared how they calculate their top selling product lists too.

Sure, we don't know for certain how accurate the "18%" is, because sampling and denominators are not explicitly defined. But it still likely paints a fairly representative picture of current AMD vs Nvidia GPU adoption by gamers.

That's where I am coming from as well, and we shouldn't be surprised that Valve doesn't provide that further information and detail. This sort of stuff is very valuable information, data that people pay good money for. Indeed, we're lucky that Valve provides any of this to the general public at all.

Valve has no reason to manipulate this data, and there is no indication that they are incompetently assessing it. On the contrary, most of the criticism I see of the Survey is comically bad, and while The Egg might not repeat those particular (and hilarious) erroneous arguments, he seems to be following the same general sentiment.

cynan wrote:

It would be nice if Valve published a brief whitepaper detailing the methodology of their hardware survey. Just a summary of how their sampling algorithms work and criteria for determining vendor, and time frames for denominators. But I suppose that would be too much "pro bono" resources even for Valve

Right, they're not going to provide that sort of additional detail for free when they are all but certainly making some money selling it.

So lets let look under the hood at these headline figures of 82% Nvidia and 18% AMD. Let's look at Nvidia's Pascal chips first. The most popular is the 1060 at 6.52%. Next is the 1070 with 3.28%, the 1080 with 1.69% and the 1080ti with 0.56%. Bringing a total for all Pascal cards to 12.05%. Whilst the 1060 is the most popular card the second most popular is the 960 with 5.89%, the 750ti (a Fermi card!!) with 5.40% and then the 970 with 4.46%. These three cards are between 2.5 and 3 years old now and are legacy cards. Some of these will be the original owner's card but a number will be second and third-hand resales.There is not a single AMD Fury or RX 580 even on the list. What? One can only presume, for some reason they are in the 'other' category. Four Nvidia mobile chips between them also have 10x the market share of the 1080ti.

So how do those figures then square with this research https://jonpeddie.com/press-releases/de ... ained-mark I don't think many of those $3.6bn of shipments included any 750ti's, 960's or 970's for that matter. Another serious flaw is there is no baseline figure to compare the market share and individual cards against. As they don't publish how many people respond to the surveys what exactly is Nvidia's 82% of? Is that a 1,000 respondents, a 1m, a billion who knows and therefore the figure is a nonsense quite frankly and statistically irrelevant.

Also I think these figures contain a lot of double counting. Let's say respondent A completes the survey with a 960 and then buys an RX 580 but doesn't fill in the survey again. Respondent B buys the second hand 960 and fills in the survey. Presumably Valve will count that as two 960's as two completely different users have responded but with the same card and Steam won't know that. Unfortunately we don't know because the Steam survey doesn't give us that information.

I'm more inclined to trust the John Peddie research TBH because that is based on ACTUAL shipments. I accept that will include cards for mining but that works for both companies as the 1060 is the second most popular card after the RX 480/580 and Nvidia definitely want a piece of that action http://www.fudzilla.com/news/graphics/4 ... ing-driverI think Nvidia 70% and AMD 30% is a much more accurate view of the overall market share and at 30% AMD's market share is high enough to keep games developers interested. Just take a look at this http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases ... feb28.aspx. Not a bad stable of game titles there.

I'm more inclined to trust the John Peddie research TBH because that is based on ACTUAL shipments.

Everything else you wrote is on point, and I agree with this too though using the linked data for AIBs does substantially undercount by excluding all those gaming on (Intel or AMD) iGPUs; the other/main regularly published JPR figure (https://jonpeddie.com/press-releases/de ... ed-8-nvidi which is for all PC GPU shipments) overcounts by including all of the GPUs shipped which are never used for any gaming (the majority!).

That said, the averages of the market share in that latter report (yes, I know you can't do that!) over the last 5Y are 15.7% AMD and 15.9% NVIDIA, and the average for the last year is 13.5% AMD 15.8% NVIDIA.

...

Intel is the elephant in the room here: according to JPR, it's been the leader in GPU market share every quarter since Q3'03 (at least -- NVIDIA was ahead in Q4'02, and Intel in Q4'03 number and it's certain from the text that JPR put Intel well ahead in Q3'03 too -- Q2'03 and Q1'03 are not in any press release still available); NVIDIA has only been in second place (this time!) since Q1'15 ...

Last edited by Topinio on Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

So lets let look under the hood at these headline figures of 82% Nvidia and 18% AMD. Let's look at Nvidia's Pascal chips first. The most popular is the 1060 at 6.52%. Next is the 1070 with 3.28%, the 1080 with 1.69% and the 1080ti with 0.56%. Bringing a total for all Pascal cards to 12.05%. Whilst the 1060 is the most popular card the second most popular is the 960 with 5.89%, the 750ti (a Fermi card!!) with 5.40% and then the 970 with 4.46%. These three cards are between 2.5 and 3 years old now and are legacy cards. Some of these will be the original owner's card but a number will be second and third-hand resales.There is not a single AMD Fury or RX 580 even on the list. What? One can only presume, for some reason they are in the 'other' category. Four Nvidia mobile chips between them also have 10x the market share of the 1080ti.

The reason is obviously that they are below the threshold, as both those cards are listed just fine elsewhere:

I mean, you guys realize that this is clearly an artifact of presentation, right? That you've gone full conspiracy theory because Steam decided that ~100 listings, down to ~0.15% of the market, was scrolling the page enough?

Lordhawkwind wrote:

So how do those figures then square with this research https://jonpeddie.com/press-releases/de ... ained-mark I don't think many of those $3.6bn of shipments included any 750ti's, 960's or 970's for that matter. Another serious flaw is there is no baseline figure to compare the market share and individual cards against. As they don't publish how many people respond to the surveys what exactly is Nvidia's 82% of? Is that a 1,000 respondents, a 1m, a billion who knows and therefore the figure is a nonsense quite frankly and statistically irrelevant.

The dominance of Nvidia's cards in Steam survey squares just fine with their dominance of the AIB market, especially since it is well-known that AMD's cards are preferred for mining and thus it is reasonable that a larger proportion of their already diminished market share would never appear in the survey because they are plugged 4+ into bare motherboards on milk-crates being pixie-booted into a linux mining distro that doesn't include Steam.

I have no idea why you think citing the same sort market research that Kougar and I have been touting from the beginning is, in any way, a repudiation of what we have been saying.

Lordhawkwind wrote:

Also I think these figures contain a lot of double counting. Let's say respondent A completes the survey with a 960 and then buys an RX 580 but doesn't fill in the survey again. Respondent B buys the second hand 960 and fills in the survey. Presumably Valve will count that as two 960's as two completely different users have responded but with the same card and Steam won't know that. Unfortunately we don't know because the Steam survey doesn't give us that information

This works identically in the reverse scenario, and thus this is a classic trope of ridiculously bad statistical argument.

Like I said already, a lot of anti-steam hardware survey sentiment on the internet is driven by incredibly ignorant statistical skepticism selectively deployed only against Valve. I'm sorry to see it so plain here as well.

Lordhawkwind wrote:

I'm more inclined to trust the John Peddie research TBH because that is based on ACTUAL shipments. I accept that will include cards for mining but that works for both companies as the 1060 is the second most popular card after the RX 480/580 and Nvidia definitely want a piece of that action http://www.fudzilla.com/news/graphics/4 ... ing-driverI think Nvidia 70% and AMD 30% is a much more accurate view of the overall market share and at 30% AMD's market share is high enough to keep games developers interested. Just take a look at this http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases ... feb28.aspx. Not a bad stable of game titles there.

You're the fanboy with the bias, seriously. When you start in with "BUT ANYWAY LOOK AT DEVELOPER SUPPORT", come on, you're "seeing red".

Glorious please enlighten me how many people actually responded to the Steam survey so we can form a baseline? I can't find it anywhere TBH. From an advertising viewpoint if you publish any statistics regarding a product you have to publish the baseline respondents so people can make a reasoned decision as to whether your claim is worthwhile or not. So 82% of 10 people is not quite as good as 82% of 100,000 people. As Steam aren't pushing a product presumably they don't have to provide this evidence. Please explain to me, in plain English, exactly how they work out the percentages as I'm really interested TBH. Can you tell me the number of respondents or not. Simples. I can then work out the math.

Glorious please enlighten me how many people actually responded to the Steam survey so we can form a baseline? I can't find it anywhere TBH. From an advertising viewpoint if you publish any statistics regarding a product you have to publish the baseline respondents so people can make a reasoned decision as to whether your claim is worthwhile or not. So 82% of 10 people is not quite as good as 82% of 100,000 people. As Steam aren't pushing a product presumably they don't have to provide this evidence. Please explain to me, in plain English, exactly how they work out the percentages as I'm really interested TBH. Can you tell me the number of respondents or not. Simples. I can then work out the math.

No you can't. Because if you could, you'd "work out the math" with arbitrary numbers, but we all know you're not going to do that, because you can't.

You want to google something? Try "nonignorable nonresponse" and come back when you can explain to me how it relates to what you only think your argument is.

When you factor in the mining situation, how could AMD's GPU share not be diminishing on Steam, a gaming platform? Why are we even debating this?

How long has it been since you could even buy mid-high range Radeon GPUs at MSRP? (The 10 people who got Vega at "launch" prices aside). 5 months? You guys know about the recent etherium boom right? Which, until Nvidia finally came out with a mining driver about 2 months ago, was mined with vastly superior performance per watt (and hardware cost at original MSRP) on polaris?

That means that the majority of those on Steam who upgraded their GPU in the past half year have been heavily motivated to go with Nvidia, even if they would have preferred AMD. I mean, just where are these AMD GPUs that are supposed to maintaining AMD's Steam share foothold as subscribers gradually upgrade?

The reason why AMD cards aren't being counted is not because of some differential bias where less people switching to AMD GPUs have an opportunity or inclination to participate in the survey. It's because there have been relatively few gamers who have had any sort of reasonable opportunity to upgrade/sidegrade to AMD in the past few months. Gradually, as more upgrade, there has only been one direction for AMD share to go.

Perhaps the steam survey is not completely representative of the distribution of GPU manufacturers across gamers (though there is no reason to suspect it isn't at least a reasonable representation). But what surely isn't representative of such a distribution among gamers are statistics based upon shipment numbers. It's been many months since the majority of AMD GPUs shipped haved ended up in gamers' hands.

And with the non-existent supply of Vega and an RX 580 sill commanding a 20% premium over a GTX 1060 (when the 580's original MSRP was slightly less, and similar gaming performance), AMD's steam share will only diminish further over the short term.

Perhaps the steam survey is not completely representative of the distribution of GPU manufacturers across gamers Oh so now you're finally agreeing with me. I'm still awaiting you or Glorious to provide me with the baseline respondents so we can actually work out what 82% market share actually is.

When you factor in the mining situation, how could AMD's GPU share not be diminishing on Steam, a gaming platform? Why are we even debating this? So everybody who has a mining card doesn't game. Can you PROVE that as a fact or is it just another pointless statement without any factual evidence. The 1060 is the second most popular mining card so none of them play games. Really? What about gamers who might only use Origin or Uplay as their game client do they not count? I use them all TBH and I've never filled in a steam survey as I bet most people haven't. So just like glorious if you want me to 'go away' please provide me with the number of respondents and then I'll gladly go. If you can't then maybe you and glorious should acknowledge that the Steam survey is not at all representative of GPU market share. Let's see what you can do.